[photolady95]

It used to spell Samsung as well, right!?

I wouldn't know, I've only owned Pentax cameras, since 1995.

[Dan Rentea]

I would use any camera (DSLR or mirrorless) as long as I have lots of options when comes to lenses. So, the most important thing for me are the lenses. Then I like a customizable camera and My Menu it's also a must (to be able to change the most important 10-15 features at a press of a button).

What I would like from mirrorless in a DSLR is:
- touch af which is way faster than joystick
- eye af
- silent shooting when OVF it's being used
- no front/back focus

But as long as I have options when comes to lenses I can deal with shortcomings of cameras.

[Serkevan]

After the K-1, if it doesn't have three control wheels, out. I don't want to fiddle with extra buttons to get the exposure I want, when the K-1 (or KP, soon the K-new) lets you do it at the flick of a finger. Don't even get me started on the Canikony* models without front wheel...
Other things of note:
-Large, bright, 100% OVF.
-IBIS
-Great build quality and long-lasting components
-Fits the hand like a glove
-Has a good metering system (I am still waiting for the aperture simulator for K/M-series lenses and, while we are at it, automatic ETTR or at least highlight-weighted metering, Pentax!). The K-1 does a "just fine" job once you learn to estimate the EV compensation needed.
-Great IQ and low noise up to ISO 3200-6400.

[Wasp]

I won't buy a Canon full frame DSLR because it doesn't play nice with K mount lenses. Adapters are readily available, but the Canon mirror will hit the Pentax aperture lever. Unless you break off our ground down that lever, forever ruining it for use on Pentax DSLRs.

I won't buy a Canon crop frame DSLR or MILC because of the 1.6x crop factor. It's just dumb and that is that. Why not 1.5x like everybody else?

A Canon full frame MILC? The internet commentariat says that dynamic range is not up to that of some competing products...

[Madaboutpix]

Er, obsessive fretting about "deal-breakers" -- overemphasis of single features without considering the whole package?

Admittedly, there are a couple of things that would seriously put me off:

• iffy image output quality
• poor ergonomics and user interface
• lack of a serious OVF
• cheap materials/parts, shoddy build quality
• excessive bulk and weight
• lack of weather-sealing and general ruggedness
• poor processability of RAW image files
• sluggish, imprecise AF performance
• uninspiring native lenses
• utter joylessness
• total inaffordability

[texandrews]

Well, pretty much, if it does not say "Pentax" somewhere on it!

Yeah, that's pretty much my criterion, based on my collection of lenses now.

[Walkingwolf]

Wow! So MANY things that pose as dealbreakers!
Maybe better to just get binoculars??
🤪😜😀😀🤭🤭

[StiffLegged]

Thanks to all who have contributed to these pages of merriment, I never knew what a convention of Angry Photographers might look like but now have half an idea!

[Ivan]

Don't throw stones at me. But the main thing for me. I will never buy a new SLR camera. New technologies leave the mirror in the past. Very soon professional photographers will switch to new systems and then it will become clear to everyone that the old systems are over.While autofocus is a weak point, in some cases it is already faster.I can of course be wrong.But something tells me.

---------- Post added 02-11-20 at 12:56 PM ----------

I've seen very old cameras in studios.But in addition there is wildlife, children, newlyweds. And I think the technology of making lenses has changed, before the glass was gaining sharpness F\8, modern samples have a different picture. You can talk about the image of the lens as much as you like, but you often need the usual sharpness with an open one.

---------- Post added 02-11-20 at 01:09 PM ----------

Same is valid for the new generation of cars.

Have you tried to enter the address in the car with the joystick at least once?

I wouldn't know, I've only owned Pentax cameras, since 1995.

Then you were about 11 I guess (in Pentax Years) when people learned to spell Samsung as well.

[cpk]

Originally posted by Steve Beswick*
So you won’t buy a Canon in 2020 because they did something kinda crappy in the 1980’s?

Absolutely.

I know of a camera store back then which would not carry Canon for that very reason. They do now, but the original owner is no longer there.

[Serkevan]

New technologies leave the mirror in the past. Very soon professional photographers will switch to new systems and then it will become clear to everyone that the old systems are over.

And that will be the day I stop this hobby. An EVF is beyond worthless to me. Why should I settle for a low quality screen? An OVF shows substantially higher dynamic range, follows action much faster and, most importantly, does not give me a headache with massive motion blur.

---------- Post added 02-11-20 at 08:32 PM ----------

But in addition there is wildlife, children, newlyweds.

I kinda just got out of a wedding with a big bunch of good shots. And that was shooting as a guest (no good positioning), with a lens from the early 90s (Tokina 70-210/4.5) and the situation being literally the first time I ever used AF.C on the K-1...

Don't blame the gear. Definitely not the mirror.

[loveisageless]

I guess the deal breakers for me are the features that I have come to cherish with my Pentax DSLR cameras:

Excellent ergonomics
Buttons instead of menus for white balance, iso, and exposure compensation
IBIS
LCD on top
Front and rear dials
Image replay zoom using a dial, not an inconveniently placed button
Excellent dynamic range
Accessories that can be used on multiple models, i.e. cable releases, IR remotes, batteries
SD card option

[Wheatridger]

And that will be the day I stop this hobby. An EVF is beyond worthless to me. Why should I settle for a low quality screen? An OVF shows substantially higher dynamic range, follows action much faster and, most importantly, does not give me a headache with massive motion blur.[COLOR="Silver"]

This! Every time I've tested the EVF in a new camera, I've been disappointed in the viewfinder image. Most of all the Dynamic Range, which seems about half the stops that the sensor is actually capable of capturing. My climate has me working in bright sun at higher altitude, so I'm always fighting excessive contrast. A VF of any kind that shows me Zone III through Zone VIII isn't good enough. Are you with me, kids?

I understand the value of EVFs in dim light, they're a useful target acquisition tool. And I realize that they get better every generation. The Nikon Z6 I tried was quite good in detail, and a stop or so better in DR. Someday. those EVFs might become an enjoyable experience, but I'm not investing my money in them until they're a perfected technology, like pentaprisms and mirrors.

[stevebrot]

I could tell you why I don't own a KP, but that would not be fair to that exceptionally good camera. I could also tell you why I bought my K-3 over both the D7100 and D7200, but that would also not be fair to those fine cameras. I did not get an A7 due to the EVF giving me vertigo and Canon product was never in the running due to poor value proposition for my subject choices.

Deal breakers are lack of features that I currently use on a regular basis, cost, ergonomics, and lack of performance that is superior to task over what I currently own. Of course, those are all strongly personal.


Steve